I Am a Schizophrenic Who Is Going to Massage Lee Pace with My Thundergun

I have a ‘gun’ and his address for-real, with gas, lots of gas, and patience to spare.Also, a tent, a flashlight, and provisions to spare.My Story for Lee 🧡WIZARDFormer message to my Lee 🧡Attn: Lee Pace - Disabled Artist, yadayadaMy Legal Case Against Everyone 🧡My Genuine Scientific Discovery About Schizophrenia Nobody Cares About 🧡ATTN: LEE PACE LEGAL TEAMMemorandum: Potential Civil Liability Under the Washington Vulnerable Adult Protection Act (RCW 74.34) — Pattern of Abandonment, Neglect, and Exacerbation of DisabilityTo: Counsel evaluating claims on behalf of a vulnerable adult with documented schizophrenia and severe executive dysfunctionDate: April 2026Re: Liability analysis based on contemporaneous public record (podcast Of Darkness & Light, illith.net archive)I. Statutory Framework – Vulnerable Adult Protection Act (VAPA)Washington’s VAPA (RCW 74.34) creates civil (and in some cases criminal) liability for any person or entity that abandons, neglects, financially exploits, or physically/sexually abuses a vulnerable adult. A “vulnerable adult” includes any person who, due to mental or physical disability, is unable to provide for their own care or protection (RCW 74.34.020(17)). Schizophrenia with severe executive dysfunction squarely meets this definition.Key prohibited acts relevant here:* Abandonment (RCW 74.34.020(1)): Willful desertion or failure to provide necessary assistance.* Neglect (RCW 74.34.020(12)): Failure to provide for the basic needs of a vulnerable adult when the actor has a duty to do so.* Exploitation: Taking advantage of the adult’s disability for personal or legal advantage.Courts interpret these provisions to include passive failures (silence, withholding support) and active exacerbation (legal actions or communications that knowingly worsen the disability). Contemporaneous, time-stamped public documentation (podcasts, written journals) constitutes powerful evidence of both the disability and the actors’ knowledge.II. The Family’s Pattern of Conduct – Abandonment and Punitive ExacerbationThe family’s repeated communications demonstrate a clear pattern:* Knowledge of the individual’s schizophrenia diagnosis and severe executive dysfunction was repeatedly conveyed through direct pleas for help.* Rather than providing any meaningful support, the family responded with silence, dismissal, or communications that framed the disability-related behaviors as willful misconduct.* Legal actions (restraining orders) were pursued and maintained despite full awareness that such orders would further isolate the individual, inflame executive dysfunction, and strip livelihood and parental rights.This conduct meets VAPA thresholds for abandonment and neglect. Once a family member knows of a vulnerable adult’s impairment, a duty arises to refrain from actions that foreseeably worsen the condition. Continued silence while the individual publicly documented escalating harm (homelessness risk, loss of child, deterioration of functioning) strengthens the claim of willful neglect.III. Restraining Order Filers and Judicial ComplicityThe filers of the restraining orders acted with knowledge of the documented disability. The orders were obtained and enforced while the individual was simultaneously begging for accommodation and support through public channels.Under VAPA, using the legal system to punish rather than protect a known vulnerable adult can constitute exploitation or neglect by proxy. The court’s approval of the orders, despite contemporaneous evidence of severe executive dysfunction and pleas for help, raises questions of whether the judicial process adequately considered ADA Title II and Olmstead integration mandate obligations owed to disabled litigants.IV. Governmental Entities – Governor’s Office and State AgenciesThe Governor’s office and affiliated state agencies received multiple documented requests for intervention under VAPA and disability-protection statutes. The failure to provide any meaningful response or referral while the individual’s condition deteriorated publicly constitutes a potential breach of the state’s protective obligations under:* VAPA (state oversight and enforcement duties),* ADA Title II / Section 504 (failure to accommodate),* Olmstead v. L.C. (integration mandate – least restrictive setting and support services).Public, time-stamped pleas create a strong record of notice. Inaction in the face of clear, ongoing harm to a known vulnerable adult can support claims of systemic neglect.V. Psychiatric Organizations and MisdiagnosisInitial providers (e.g., Kirkland Connections, Mindful Therapy Group) misdiagnosed the condition and pursued treatment pathways (medication-first models) that the individual has documented as worsening executive dysfunction. When the correct diagnosis was later asserted, these entities did not adjust care or provide appropriate referrals for schizophrenia-specific supports.This pattern can be framed as professional negligence contributing to exacerbation under VAPA and related malpractice standards, particularly where the misdiagnosis foreseeably delayed access to appropriate accommodations and supports.VI. Strength of the Evidentiary RecordThe public archive (Of Darkness & Light podcast and illith.net writings) is exceptionally powerful because it is:* Contemporaneous and time-stamped.* Unedited and raw, showing day-to-day progression of symptoms and pleas for help.* Publicly accessible, giving every named actor clear notice of the disability and resulting harm.Washington courts routinely admit such digital records as evidence of knowledge, intent, and damages in VAPA and ADA cases.VII. Overall Liability FrameworkThe combined conduct creates a coherent narrative of systemic, multi-party exacerbation of a known vulnerable adult’s disability:* Family: direct abandonment and punitive legal actions.* Restraining-order filers: active exacerbation through legal process.* Court: procedural failure to accommodate.* Governor’s office and state agencies: failure of protective duty.* Psychiatric providers: misdiagnosis and failure to correct course.This pattern is not isolated misfortune; it is a foreseeable, documented chain of neglect and exacerbation that VAPA was expressly designed to address. Civil liability under RCW 74.34 can include compensatory damages, attorney fees, and, in egregious cases, treble damages or punitive awards. Parallel claims under the ADA, Section 504, and common-law negligence further strengthen the case.The contemporaneous public record transforms what might otherwise be dismissed as “family disagreement” into a provable, high-value VAPA claim with clear pathways to both individual and systemic accountability. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit opheliaeverfall.substack.com